Trial reportBMC health services research2017
An Australian general practice based strategy to improve chronic disease prevention, and its impact on patient reported outcomes: evaluation of the preventive evidence into practice cluster randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Strategies to improve the implementation of preventive care in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Promoting physical activity in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Pooled it
- General health checks in adults for reducing morbidity and mortality from disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Patient Perspectives of Early Interventions for Healthy Ageing in General Practice: A Qualitative Study.Australasian journal on ageing · 2026Article
- Exploring targeted preventive health check interventions - a realist synthesis.BMC public health · 2023Review
- Successes and challenges of primary health care in Australia: A scoping review and comparative analysis.Journal of global health · 2023Article
- Understanding how general practice nurses support adult lifestyle risk reduction: An integrative review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2022Review
- How Sociodemographic Factors Impact the Utilization of Recommended Clinical Preventive Screening Services in Poland: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Ten-Year Follow-Up of Clinical Governance Implementation in Primary Care: Improving Screening, Diagnosis and Control of Cardiovascular Risk Factors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Beliefs and attitudes towards lifestyle change and risks in primary care - a community-based study.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImplementing evidence-based chronic disease prevention with a practice-wide population is challenging in primary care.
methodsPEP Intervention practices received education, clinical audit and feedback and practice facilitation. Patients (40‑69 years) without chronic disease from trial and control practices were invited to participate in baseline and 12 month follow up questionnaires. Patient-recalled receipt of GP services and referral, and the proportion of patients at risk were compared over time and between intervention and control groups. Mean difference in BMI, diet and physical activity between baseline and follow up were calculated and compared using a paired t-test. Change in the proportion of patients meeting the definition for physical activity diet and weight risk was calculated using McNemar's test and multilevel analysis was used to determine the effect of the intervention on follow-up scores.
resultsFive hundred eighty nine patients completed both questionnaires. No significant changes were found in the proportion of patients reporting a BP, cholesterol, glucose or weight check in either group. Less than one in six at-risk patients reported receiving lifestyle advice or referral at baseline with little change at follow up. More intervention patients reported attempts to improve their diet and reduce weight. Mean score improved for diet in the intervention group (p = 0.04) but self-reported BMI and PA risk did not significantly change in either group. There was no significant change in the proportion of patients who reported being at-risk for diet, PA or weight, and no changes in PA, diet and BMI in multilevel linear regression adjusted for patient age, sex, practice size and state. There was good fidelity to the intervention but practices varied in their capacity to address changes.
conclusionsThe lack of measurable effect within this trial may be attributable to the complexities around behaviour change and/or system change. This trial highlights some of the challenges in providing suitable chronic disease preventive interventions which are both scalable to whole practice populations and meet the needs of diverse practice structures.
trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12612000578808 (29/5/2012). This trial registration is retrospective as our first patient returned their consent on the 21/5/2012. Patient recruitment was ongoing until 31/10/2012.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.